USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
I'm sorry, I assumed you understood how heat radiates. We can have Mr. Wizard explain that next.

I'm dying here. When you were talking about trials I assumed you meant wear/durability and traffic safety, not a full-on global warming science fair project.
Maybe you should just read what I wrote, instead of making up your own BS.
"Reducing the localized temp increases from dark surfaces". It's a pretty simple concept. People have been working on reducing urban heat for a while now.
You keep saying the same thing over and over as if that makes it less silly.
I'm hoping at some point, you'll comprehend that what I wrote, and what they're trying to determine, isn't "to see if dark stuff gets hotter in the sun". I'm not optimistic.
I'm laughing my arse off imagining you out there with a thermometer measuring the temperature. I'd love to hear what your test design would look like.
You truly are a Kalifornian, and you look like a dufus defending this idiocy. DC....saving the earth...one $40k mile of white paint at a time.
At least you stopped with your moronic nonsense about figuring out if dark surfaces get hot. You slink away from that, and try something else.
Of course, you've moved on to more idiocy. I'm sure you know there are dozens of ways to measure air and surface temps.
As for this trial, I don't really care what you think. You sound like a 75 year old grocery store bagger with a GED.
People who are afraid to try new things never accomplish anything meaningful. This might be a horrible failure. It may work great.
Here's a question. Why do you think $40k/mile is an astronomical number. How much do you think it costs to repave or maintain a mile of road? $1M? $2M? Every 10 or 15 years? What if this sealant gives you an extra year or 2? Then it pays for itself. Of course, you'd never know the answer to that. You'd still be coughing up dirt balls in your covered wagon.

HUH? it cost 40k a mile and does not proclaim that it saves wear and tear on the road, how would it? But even if it meant that the road did not have to be repaved for an extra year, then yes if the road has to be paved every 10 years then it would save that $1m per mile in 10 pave cycles or 100 years......thank god for that savings